Skip to main content

About your Search

20130127
20130127
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
, in politics and in democracy, sometimes you win elections, sometimes you lose elections. i worked very hard. but i lost and then president obama asked me to be secretary of state. and i said yes. >> geraldo: what do you figure, bill kristol -- that appearance as president obama tilting toward hillary in 2016? or just thanking her for her hard work on behalf of his administration? >> i think tharching her, it's nice to see them, you know, tig the bow on four years of working together. but look, the cold judgment's going to be about whether the foreign and international security policies have worked. what the withdrawal from afghanistan is going to mean. how things are going in north africa, cuts in the defense budget. women in combat. the president's doing a lot in the foreign defense policy. in his first term, he was more moderate, he stayed in the center, he kept bob gates and general petraeus and leon panet a. now he has a doveish agend a. hillary clinton he was more hawkish than john kerry will be. i am worried personally for four years of the new obama team in national security. >> repo
obama almost never mentions the words climate change and cap and trade during the campaign, paul, that's because they are political losers. they are big tax increases on workers, on union workers, on manufacturing workers. so the democrats have avoided that issue now that they have won this election. they have sort of sprung it out on people. i still don't believe the votes are there in the united states senate and the house to pass anything like either the carbon tax or by the way the democrats are also talking about maybe an energy tax, like a gasoline tax. there is no political support there. that's why i think kim is right. if they are going to do this it's going to have to be through the regulatory angle trying to outlaw carbon in that way. >> james, why mention it so prominently or was this sort and switch for the environmentalists. you mention it re tore rickly and say i'm really behind you. in policy terms, you don't give them anything. >> there may be some bait and switch. i think this is the key. if he doesn't neeyd to get anythingt. through the congress, as the potomac watch
it. we want to hear him say climate change and science deniers, it sets up a huge political battle over the head of the e.p.a. >> it's not just obama. the failure of cap and trade was through the congress, not just republicans but democrats in congress. they had ties to coal, nuclear et cetera. i feel like the debate is moving, but it's like the gun control debate, but further behind. we have horrible shootings, we say we have to do something after gabby giffords then aurora. then after sandy hook, it got put on the agenda. climate change is moving that way, too. we keep saying after the explosions in louisiana we have to do something. we have to do something then, you know, hurricane sandy happens and it looks like finally we have reached that moment where we are going to do something. i don't know. i think it might take one more horrible environmental tragedy for it to get put on the agenda. >> we have done -- the fact the e.p.a. exists and it was created under richard nixon. as i was reading about it thinking about today, when he established the e.p.a., nixon said he wanted the
out in return for weapons. another one is in the near future. abc news, new york. >> president obama promised to use his second term to protect middle class americans. we will look at a big week in washington and a political gunfight in congress and which can dates are already in position for 2016. don't miss "this week" with george stephanopoulos, coming up at 8:00 right here on abc7. >> tense of house of people on both sides of the abortion issue turned out yesterday in downtown san francisco in a pair of dueling rallies centered around the 30th anniversary of roe v. wade division. organization for the walk for life say 40,000 supporters were at the rally. that followed an earlier gathering at justin herman plaza. four decades after the legalization of abortion the debate continues. >> abortion hurts people and societies and children and it needs to be become unthinkable. >> they seem to think they should have control of what women do with their bodies and it isn't right. >> they say it was the largest turnout the march for life has ever had in its nine years in san francisco. >>>
the political implications of what happens. robert, is this no matter how it looks a win for the white house? is this a win for president obama? does this become next to probably health care reform one of his lasting legacies? >> yes however i think it is a net neutral for both parties at the end of the day. the white house will claim it as they should because they are driving the conversation. republicans are also going to claim credit as they should because they are going to say we got this through the house and senate. >> i guess we could aargue that if republicans and democrats aren't talking about impgration reform in a year that is a win for the gop, as well. >> i love talking about politics as much as the next guy. on this issue this is a win for the country. you cannot have 13 million people in the shadows and think that is good for the future of the country. too many young people worried about the future. that is not the way a country needs to be run. in terms of the political consequences or the benefits, both sides i think can make the argument that they benefit. at the end of the
that barack obama really wasn't a natural-born citizen? so what? constitutional obedience has a pernicious impact on our political culture. take the recent debate about gun control. none of my friends can believe it but i happen to be skeptical of most forms of gun control. i understand though that's not everyone's view. and i'm eager to talk with people who disagree. but what happens when the issue gets constitutionalized? then we turn the question over to lawyers. and lawyers do with it what lawyers do. so instead of talking about whether gun control makes sense in our country we talk about what people thought of it two centuries ago. worse yet talking about gun control in terms of constitutional obligation needlessly raises the temperature of political discussion. instead of a question of a policy about which reasonable people can disagree it becomes a test of one's commitment to our foundational document and so to america itself. this is our country. we live in it. and we have a right to the kind of country we want. we would not allow the french or the united nations to rule us. and ne
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)